cflock? What's that for? : chuckle:
At 10:51 AM 10/8/2002 -0700, you wrote: >Oh c'mon Jeffry! I've seen that forgotten <cflock..> before! :) > > > >| -----Original Message----- >| From: Jeffry Houser [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] >| Sent: Tuesday, October 08, 2002 10:20 AM >| To: CF-Talk >| Subject: RE: LONG time CF Supporter - About ready to dump CF! >| >| >| I have to put in my .02 . >| Internet Languages do not seem inherently sloppy to me, >| however a lot of >| sloppy code is written. I do not believe that this is unique to web >| languages. >| >| I believe that all my web applications are uniform, >| predictable, and >| structured. >| >| At 10:07 AM 10/8/2002 -0700, you wrote: >| >Hi Lee, >| > Your point is well taken, I was a bit bummed that >| some of our >| > existing code >| >didn't work too. I have to differ with you a bit though. >| > >| > Internet languages (html, javascript, etc) are >| awful sloppy. >| >It >| > makes them >| >hard to read/debug. Coming from a C/Java stand point they >| are too forgiving. >| >If you look at the trend of the internet (xhtml, xml, etc), >| you'll notice >| >that code tightening is where we are going. >| > >| > Code often runs better when it is uniform, predictable, and >| > structured. >| > >| > It's a bit painful, but I think it will help cf run faster, >| >among >| > other >| >things. >| > >| > >| >-----Original Message----- >| >From: Lee Fuller [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] >| >Sent: Tuesday, October 08, 2002 9:54 AM >| >To: CF-Talk >| >Subject: RE: LONG time CF Supporter - About ready to dump CF! >| > >| > >| >Hey Stace! >| > >| >I understand. And with this, it's most likely the same type >| of issue. >| > >| >One of the things, however, that sticks in my craw (as it were) was >| >that during the months leading up to CFMX's release, we were >| told OVER >| >and OVER again that existing code would work well in CFMX, >| with little, >| >if any, changes. I heard that bell ring in the tower more than 20 >| >times, that I can count on one hand. <grin> >| > >| >Yet here we are with "locking causes this", "change code to >| do this or >| >that", "fix up the code". Uhm... ? So am I to believe that >| the chant >| >was false? Telling my clients to go back and "fix" their >| code is like >| >saying.. >| > >| > "Uhm.. Sorry you can't park that car here, it's BLUE!" >| > "But you told me to paint it blue!?!?" >| > "I know, but now we're back to only RED cars. Sorry.. Go >| >paint it BLUE!" >| > >| >It's more than just an "inconvenience", to say the least. >| If I switch >| >back to 5, all the touting I did about CFMX's behavior and power was >| >for naught. And even worse, many of the CF clients may just opt for >| >ASP, PHP, etc., just cuz they don't believe me telling them >| "Well.. But >| >don't worry, it'll be fixed. Really!" >| > >| > >| >| -----Original Message----- >| >| From: Stacy Young [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] >| >| Sent: Tuesday, October 08, 2002 9:33 AM >| >| To: CF-Talk >| >| Subject: RE: LONG time CF Supporter - About ready to dump CF! >| >| >| >| >| >| Hi Lee, >| >| >| >| Out of 3 incidents I've opened relating to CFMX..I only got dinged >| >| for 1 of 'em...cause it was an environment issue on our end. >| >| >| >| Cheers, >| >| >| >| Stace >| >| >| >| -----Original Message----- >| >| From: Lee Fuller [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] >| >| Sent: Tuesday, October 08, 2002 12:10 PM >| >| To: CF-Talk >| >| Subject: RE: LONG time CF Supporter - About ready to dump CF! >| >| >| >| Jesse, >| >| >| >| Yeah.. We understand that. We completely understand what you're >| >| saying. But you missed my last post (or maybe I just haven't read >| >| your response yet <grin>) that YOU may not want us to pay. >| But there >| >| are others that WOULD. And that's what keeps us from calling up >| >| good-ol' MM. >| >| >| >| >| >| | -----Original Message----- >| >| | From: Jesse Noller [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] >| >| | Sent: Tuesday, October 08, 2002 8:36 AM >| >| | To: CF-Talk >| >| | Subject: RE: LONG time CF Supporter - About ready to dump CF! >| >| | >| >| | >| >| | I think that something is being missed. If the bug is with >| >| | CFMX, you do not pay. That simple, we have our reasons >| for asking >| >| | for a credit card number, but it doesn't change the fact >| that if it >| >| | a cfmx bug, you do not pay. >| >| | >| >| | Do not pay. >| >| | >| >| | I understand your gripe, trust me, as someone who >| has to deal >| >| | with the varying operating systems and software packages >| I have to, >| >| | I completely understand. >| >| | >| >| | However, reading and addressing issues on mailing >| lists is not >| >| | my day-job. I do development and other assorted things. While >| >| | having the time to reply to mailing list issues is nice, >| that's not >| >| | how 99% of issues get reported and resolved. >| >| | >| >| | >| >| | >| >| | Jesse Noller >| >| | [EMAIL PROTECTED] >| >| | Macromedia Server Development >| >| | >| >| | > -----Original Message----- >| >| | > From: Dave Wilson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] >| >| | > Sent: Tuesday, October 08, 2002 11:21 AM >| >| | > To: CF-Talk >| >| | > Subject: RE: LONG time CF Supporter - About ready to dump CF! >| >| | > >| >| | > See Jesse, >| >| | > >| >| | > Many of us such as Lee and myself have been working with CF >| >| | for a long >| >| | > long time and we love the product, etc etc. >| >| | > >| >| | > When we run into problems, we take every step we can think >| >| | of to try >| >| | > and resolve the issue, not just for our own benefit, >| but for the >| >| | > benefit of the product itself. When persons like ourselves >| >| | (there are >| >| | > thousands of us) contact Macromedia to resolve an issue >| >| | it's usually >| >| | > in good spirit and we usually want to work *with* >| Macromedia in >| >| | > resolving the issues- y'know, kinda like being a beta >| >| tester. We're >| >| | > doing it for the product and the community as well as >| for our own >| >| | > benefit. Now being asked for a cc in this kind of >| >| situation is just >| >| | > too hard to stomach. It feels like walking along the >| >| | street, spotting >| >| | > a dangerous obstruction, attempting to move it to a safe >| >| place when >| >| | > suddenly being accosted by a police officer asking us to pay >| >| | > money to move such a dangerous object out of the way, >| or in this >| >| | > particular argument, provide security in case *we* do >| something >| >| | > wrong, >| >| | when what we >| >| | > are >| >| | > doing is helping. >| >| | > >| >| | > Just my $0.2 >| >| | > Dave >| >| | > >| >| | > >| >| | >| >| >| >| >| > >| > >| > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists&body=lists/cf_talk FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Get the mailserver that powers this list at http://www.coolfusion.com
